BAM !!!
[Classic/2nd edition] LL + Mutually Assured Destruction

Ok, so I posted this on the TripleA site, but just to get this idea out there to the largest number of players, here it is again.
Ok, to expound on this further…
LL is in place, and works to smooth out really wild random results, but it does nothing about the engine rolling exceptional numbers of 1’s and 2’s and throwing off the game quite a bit, by the sheer numbers of such rolls.
LL+MAD cannot address that happening, so all the annoying over rolling of 1’s and 2’s is still going to happen, and your still going to lose units that you really shouldn’t. That being said, the rationale for including {Mutually Assured Destruction} on top of LL, is to stop rolls of less that 1/6th probability from taking the game far away from where they ‘should be’ if probable result were the norm.
Take the example of the single bomber attacking the single transport. Transport hitting the bomber is a 1 in 6 chance, and that is fine and dandy. What isn’t fine and dandy, is where the attacking bomber misses the transport, because now we are talking about a 1:18 chance, and given such a situation, with a very low probability entering into the game, does not even address any further damage to the game that then occurs as a result of this low probability event.
As mentioned above, MAD cannot stop the overabundance of 1’s and 2’s being rolled, but what it can do is make the madness stop before it really gets out of hand. The mechanism for this is to apply LL, and then check for one forces remainder to be larger than the other. If both sides have the same remainder, then the disparity check fails, and MAD does not apply. If the disparity check succeeds, then MAD uses a single die, and this number is used for both sides.
In the above example, Bomber Vs Transport, we check for disparity of remainder after applying LL, and this confirms that MAD is in effect. On a roll of 56, both sides miss each other, on a 24, the bomber kills the transport and survives, and on a 1, they both kill each other! Thus, all the probable outcomes of at least 1:6 are not affected by this rule, rather, this rule prevents outcomes less likely than 1 in 6, and the game then become a step closer to strategy, and one step farther away from becoming a series of “Lucky Shots, Sir” moments.
Another example, a fighter and two infantry Vs one or two infantry, so 5:2(5:4) Without MAD, we could easily see the stronger force missing, while the weaker force ‘gets lucky’ and takes out part of the opposition. In the 5v2 battle, 1:6 chance the stronger force doesn’t get a kill, but reduce that by 50%, and we now have a 1:18 chance for the stronger force to be hit by the weaker force, while themselves not getting a hit of their own in. In the 5v4 battle, this comes in at 1:9 chance.
Looking at some real game, round one battles, Russia attacks Manchuria.
5@1 + 1@3 = 8
3@2 + 1@4 = 10With LL, this is settled by a pair of dice rolls, 12 v 14, while MAD uses just one roll for both remainders, 12 both sides get second hit, 34 Japanese hit twice while the Russians hit just the once, and 56, both side miss their chance. Best case for the weaker force, is two mutual kills, as this leaves both sides evenly balanced, and with no remainder, so second round each side takes it’s third casualty, and in the third round, the Russian force is now the stronger force, and need not fear taking any greater casualties than they inflict.
Gosh! it’s late, bedtime for me…

First off lower the A4 for bomber. That’s way to high

@SSGEN ???

I’m just saying the bomber is to strong in game.

@SSGEN Ah, gotcha. When I first read that, I was like, “What does an A4 have to do with Classic?” Lol. Do other games in the franchise lower the bombers A4? I just got my second A&A game today, but will not open it till I have a place to set it up and shoot a YouTube video of it.
Anyway, back on topic for this thread, how do you feel about the proposed option, to further limit just what crazy dice rolls can do to a game, but having an optional rule that keeps low probability results from ruling the game, rather than strategy/experience?
Playing with real people, with real dice and game boards and such, I would most likely enjoy just regular dice rolls, as that’s a part of the inperson experience. OTOH, when it’s just me and the computer screen, I’d definitely want to know that all the over rolled 1’s and 2’s being generated all out of proportion to their probability curve, are going to be offset by MAD.
What are your thought on this?

So your saying use low luck. Then any dice rolls after that is using your suggestion. MAD
Still lookin at it.
1 bomber A4 for d6 would get a hit all the time against 1 transport you would need 6 Transports to get 1 hit. I got this right so far ? 
@SSGEN
Take that back
bomber 4/2.
Transport 1/1
So bomber and transport misses
So now Bomber 2 and transport 1 =
Transport killed due to MAD ? 
Sorry, I didn’t make that as clear as I thought I did, lol. I’m infamous for thinking what I post is understood as intended, but then being shocked when I learn that I really didn’t do such a good job putting the thought out in a well explained, and clear manner.
Let me try to do a bit better job of this, then, and sorry for not getting it right the first time.
Ok, so the bomber, with an attack of 14 on a d6 flies out and makes a run on the lone transport, defending on a 1 on a d6. Low Luck takes this and does, essentially, nothing. LL+MAD takes a look at the remainder, in this case 1 v 4, and first checks that there is a difference between the remainders for both sides, and as the two sides in this example don’t have any ‘hits’, all we have left is their starting numbers. Next, in the case where one side has a better remainder than the other, MAD uses one die roll, against which both sides remainders are checked. So no separate rolls for each side, just the one for both.
So, the possible results of the single MAD roll on a d6:
1 = Both the Transport and the Bomber hit on a one, so both die.
2 = The Transport misses above a one, so only the Bomber hits.
3 = The Transport misses above a one, so only the Bomber hits.
4 = The Transport misses above a one, so only the Bomber hits.
5 = Neither the Transport nor the Bomber hit on a five, so both miss.
6 = Neither the Transport nor the Bomber hit on a six, so both miss.What this proposed optional rule is supposed to do, is keep the unlikely combat result of bomber killed, transport lives to tell about it from happening, as the probability of such happening is in itself a 1:18 chance, but if the bomber dies and the transport lived, what happens to the game after this? Does the transport pull off a landing? Do the transports allies get to land fighters in the newly gained foothold? I’ve seen both, on more than a few occasions, and just this one 1:18 chance result can really screw up an otherwise good game.
I like more strategy in my strategy games, and not so much a fan of an endless series of “Lucky Shot, Sir!” moments, nor a game that goes wildly back and forth, based upon the gods of chance whim of the moment.
Hope I explained the process better.
I also hope I didn’t cause confusion with my prattling on about why I want this added as a house rule for folks that would like it. 
Think I got most of it. Your getting away from KISS, But that’s how you want to play.
Got to remember here your playing a game that doesn’t have a lot of pieces on setup
and some pieces cost to much and the Battleship cost to much but this is all balanced into cost and setup pieces. You need battleships for punch and then your out of money.
If you want I can post a list of pieces C A D values that are close to each piece costing correctly to punch. 
@SSGEN Um, I think this post is in the wrong thread? Can you repost this in the Naval thread?

hang on.
Panther or Leo. Does this topic need to go to House rules or Classic ?